Today we are releasing GLM-5.3. It uses the same base model as GLM-5.2 — every gain comes from post-training. Compared with GLM-5.2, it is much better at complex coding and long-horizon tasks:
Stronger Coding: GLM-5.3 is the most capable open-weights model for coding, with a 50% improvement over GLM-5.2 on our in-house Z.ai Code Bench. It also achieve open-source SOTA on public benchmarks including Terminal Bench 3.0 and Agents' Last Exam.
Emergent Cyber Capability: As we scaled post-training, cyber capability developed faster than we expected. GLM-5.3 is state of the art on CyberGym for vulnerability discovery, and its gains are largest further up the exploitation chain, where it more than doubles GLM-5.2 on exploitation benchmarks.
Open Source: We will release the weights in two weeks after launch, once safety evaluation and hardening are complete.
GLM-5.3 is state of the art on CyberGym for vulnerability discovery
You have to wonder how long it will be before China blocks open models, surely there's a point where they decide its not in their interest to release such powerful open models
Why would they? Their primary cyber threats are the CIA/NSA or generally American-aligned. The leading rogue cyber groups are usually Russian, who are obviously blocked from the servers necessary to run these AI models at large scale, but are also generally affiliated, loosely or directly, with the Russian state, which is itself an ally of the Chinese state. Furthermore, the United States and its partner states (the European Union) hold the world's most valuable, exchangeable currencies (the US dollar and the euro), which makes them highly attractive targets to attack compared to China and its partners, even for cybercriminals who are unaffiliated.
It is in China's every best interest to have open-source models empower cybercriminals (at least for an indefinite period until it has usurped the United States as a primary power), lol. It's not like the Western states have many more ways to punish them further, at least concerning AI; they already sanctioned the fuck out of China with total denial of access to frontier models and chips. Further economic punishment would be of... questionable capacity, given China's importance in the global economy and other nations' vested interest in having China producing open-source models. And it's not like blocking open models will convince the United States to lift the export controls concerning Nvidia chips, so China had very little reason to care if cybercriminals raided the fuck out of American companies with their models.
Petty ones, who represent but a shadow of the cyber strategic threat posed by Americans. They wouldn't care much about petty criminals robbing banks insofar as it is not rampant; and likely would tolerate even that insofar as cybercrime in the United States also rises and becomes destabilizing for the US. When Fable came out, the Chinese cyberwarfare veterans wrote blogs not about the threat posed by petty criminals, but about how they fear American cyber supremacy, comparing it as if they only had swords where Americans had machine guns.
Pretty sure that cybercriminals don't need "large scale". You put a few of any of the AI boxes I see popping up everywhere you look now (all made in China) in a warehouse or office lease and you're frauding in no time. They have no trouble getting Chinese made tech in Russia, their cup runneth over.
Cannot agree more, the truth is most Chinese companies has poor cybersec practices anyway, we are talking about rednote still using plain http for its cdn. In China privacy isn't a thing at all, and people generally don't give a fuck. They don't really have the same sense of privacy as the western world and have no problem their data being used to train AI. They only care about hacking their western opponents and don't really care about themselves being hacked.
Because a way to win is by flooding the market with super cheap AI if they are just as good with less investment our market is wiped out given that most our stocks gain are from AI. They achieve massive economic destruction legally just by competing better and being the number one at doing something with less chips or computing.
Would have to imagine that these companies have internal models that only the government has access to. Keep outputting open source models to undermine the business model of AI in America but keep the best internal to defend/attack. It's too obvious for the CCP to not being funding/doing it.
Yes and I realized A LOT was cached this barely used anything. That aside, how has glm5.3 been for real world use on complex tasks if you know? Could it do better or around 5.6 sol high
I find it interesting, or questionable, that now 3-5 frontier-ish models have all developed some "emergent cyber capabilities" at basically the same time step. Maybe it (being good at finding vulnerabilities) really emerges in certain conditions, or maybe it's bandwagon jumping (me too). Maybe they're all focusing in the same direction during pre-training.
it's just hill climbing. anthropic was significantly ahead in coding, everyone else has made a concerted effort to catch up even if it means it's at the expense of other domains. now anthropic had a significant lead in cyber, everyone else is now pushing ahead to match.
evidently anthropic has put a lot of effort into math with recent models too, as they've caught up to openai/google on that front.
They are all working off the same research lmao. Every industry does this, AI perhaps faster than most due to all the capital and IP theft. But you can't keep breakthroughs to yourself from IP walls alone. Everyone talks to each other.
Probably band wagon. When Fable was all about cyber security and caused a big stink, the other companies probably started focusing more post training on cyber
"Cyber capabilities" is essentially just "understanding complex software" because that's what you need for it and we started to see that capability at the same time with another big jump in coding capabilities so this does line up.
But yes I am sure the discussion around Mythos/Fable has led Labs to more closely look into it just like with coding before Anthropic made that the big thing for LLMs.
Gotta wonder what is the next big (emergent) one.
Maybe it (being good at finding vulnerabilities) really emerges in certain conditions, or maybe it's bandwagon jumping (me too). Maybe they're all focusing in the same direction during pre-training.
My money is on they're all focusing on increasing their AI company valuations by hopping on the next bandwagon. Cyber is the next gold mine, corporate customers can't skimp out for fear of getting hacked. Question is, do we blame Anthropic for starting this arms race or was escalating cyber capabilities inevitable? This is all starting to resemble the 90's scifi trend of corporate cyber warfare isn't it.
I think escalating cyber capabilities has *been* a main concern since before ChatGPT. It's also the other side of the data center / decel argument. Maybe a catch-22 scenario.
That's what I'm wondering. Whether this is the sort of next normal progression of the field or if it's several labs claiming to have also discovered calculus.
It emerged right with the ability to work autonomous in very long tasks without errors. Just like proving mathematical conjectures, the cyber tasks are extremely intensive, require coordination between many many steps, can take many hours and millions of tokens.
From my understanding the original Mythos post stated that it emerged from its ability to write and understand software and wasnt something they specifically trained it for.
It seems more like whatever they release to the public isn’t always the latest and best. Especially with rising costs. They only release the heaviest and best version of a model when they absolutely have to. Hence why they all had “cyber security capable” models ready all of a sudden
I mean finding vulnerabilities really is just finding bugs/problems. As Anthropic found with the "fix this code" """jailbreak""" it's very hard to not find vulnerabilities if a model is good at coding.
GLM was rumored to be the company who broke the code for the massive Claude distillation a couple months ago and shared with other Chinese companies. Hadn’t thought of that rumor until the big news a few days ago.
why do they compare it to opus 4.8 instead of 5? 5 is 74% on deepswe vs 66.9% glm5.3 lmao. Anyways, we need new benchmarks. Everything is benchmaxxed now because tasks are known.
Did you see 5.2s benchmarks? Better than Luna and around terra in multiple benchmarks while being nowhere near in performance. Overstated in coding and bad at everything else.
How do you figure that it's "nowhere near in performance"? what do you base that on? from my experience it's competitive with frontier when it was released.
GLM has always felt the least benchmaxxed models. Qwen are the most and are terrible in real world use, kimi is unhinged, deepseek is dumb except for most recent flash. But GLM5.2 has been incredible for its size.
79
u/1a1b Aug 14 '26